Justin Bieber Collapsed from Fatigue - Polidicks

There is a god!

What's selfish about having an open mind and being respectful of other people's tastes? Once again, you have absolutely NO clue what goes on behind the scenes in the recording studio. For all you know, he could have the most honest intentions. Generalizing and making assumptions based on absolutely nothing sounds pretty retarded. So are you saying Nick Carter and Aaron Carter's work was BETTER quality and they made LESS money? Like I just said, pop music will always be what it is, popular music. Justin Bieber is fulfilling a need in the pop music market. There is a demand for him, and he's filling that demand. In time, pop music's main target demographics will want something or someone else, and it'll be the same cycle all over again like it always has. Do you have his financial information yet? I'd like to see where you got those numbers from.

[QUOTE=djshox;24793075]What's selfish about having an open mind and being respectful of other people's tastes? Once again, you have absolutely NO clue what goes on behind the scenes in the recording studio. For all you know, he could have the most honest intentions. Generalizing and making assumptions based on absolutely nothing sounds pretty retarded. So are you saying Nick Carter and Aaron Carter's work was BETTER quality and they made LESS money? [/QUOTE] I don't know who Nick Carter and Aaron Carter is, I'm not sure why you'd assume I'd know everything, allthough since all you've done is pretty much gone on and on about various hypothetical situations and tried to claim you're better than me, I'm sure you'll use it against me. But either way, no human being can keep up with everything. But I do know one good example: The Beach Boys, now they were good, but they could definatley have been better to live up to their reputation and profits. Like for example: Maybe compose their own melodies instead of stealing them from Little Richard. And I did not generalize, nor make assumptions, he has a massive fanbase, he's been known for being self-centered, he's wealthy and he can't even play an instrument. I think that pretty much says it all. If he gets stripped off of his money by greedy businessmen, it hardly matters, the money is still taken, and the product is lousy. We put standards on our foods, on our drinks and on our homes, why should music get special treatment? If we call everything artistic, then suddenly art has lost it's meaning. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/No._5%2C_1948.jpg/200px-No._5%2C_1948.jpg[/IMG] This is the most expensive peice of modern art there is, it was sold for 140 [B]million [/B]$. If you give me three days, I can make something like that pretty easy with paintcans and a baseball bat. It's hardly art, it lacks motive, and makes no sense, it's just painsplashes under a very pretentious cloak. Imagine if we accept this, and people keep making it, what will art be in 100 years from now? Same goes with music, Beiber gives people a lousy product, and he hardly deserves respect for it, and why is that? Because just like art and music, respect will start to lose it's meaning. Get some goddamn standards and stop harrassing me for being considerate about the future.

[QUOTE=Vinze;24793375]I don't know who Nick Carter and Aaron Carter is, I'm not sure why you'd assume I'd know everything, allthough since all you've done is pretty much gone on and on about various hypothetical situations and tried to claim you're better than me, I'm sure you'll use it against me. But either way, no human being can keep up with everything. But I do know one good example: The Beach Boys, now they were good, but they could definatley have been better to live up to their reputation and profits. Like for example: Maybe compose their own melodies instead of stealing them from Little Richard. And I did not generalize, nor make assumptions, he has a massive fanbase, he's been known for being self-centered, he's wealthy and he can't even play an instrument. I think that pretty much says it all. If he gets stripped off of his money by greedy businessmen, it hardly matters, the money is still taken, and the product is lousy. We put standards on our foods, on our drinks and on our homes, why should music get special treatment? If we call everything artistic, then suddenly art has lost it's meaning. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/No._5%2C_1948.jpg/200px-No._5%2C_1948.jpg[/IMG] This is the most expensive peice of modern art there is, it was sold for 140 [B]million [/B]$. If you give me three days, I can make something like that pretty easy with paintcans and a baseball bat. It's hardly art, it lacks motive, and makes no sense, it's just painsplashes under a very pretentious cloak. Imagine if we accept this, and people keep making it, what will art be in 100 years from now? Same goes with music, Beiber gives people a lousy product, and he hardly deserves respect for it, and why is that? Because just like art and music, respect will start to lose it's meaning. Get some goddamn standards and stop harrassing me for being considerate about the future.[/QUOTE] Exactly, people keep ignoring the facts and just go on about how we are just jealous of him and hate him for no reason. His music lacks soul, emotion feeling and any skill or thought. Look at my post awhile back where I posted some real examples of music. It doesn't matter if people think it has emotion, it's either it does or it doesn't. I can think the computer I'm on atm has emotion, hell I can think that it talks to me at night. But does that make it so? no, of course not. That picture is a great example of dumbing down stuff, that picture lacks everything, it's just paint thrown on paper. Nothing of skill or thought was put into this. It just proves how much our society is just liking whatever crap that comes out. But brb guys I'm going to get millions buy throwing a bucket of paint on paper then throwing it off a cliff. Then I'm going to go make a song where I say the exact same word over again with cool beats going in the backround to make it sound cool.

[QUOTE=bobsynergy;24794246]Exactly, people keep ignoring the facts and just go on about how we are just jealous of him and hate him for no reason. His music lacks soul, emotion feeling and any skill or thought. Look at my post awhile back where I posted some real examples of music. It doesn't matter if people think it has emotion, it's either it does or it doesn't. I can think the computer I'm on atm has emotion, hell I can think that it talks to me at night. But does that make it so? no, of course not. That picture is a great example of dumbing down stuff, that picture lacks everything, it's just paint thrown on paper. Nothing of skill or thought was put into this. It just proves how much our society is just liking whatever crap that comes out. But brb guys I'm going to get millions buy throwing a bucket of paint on paper then throwing it off a cliff. Then I'm going to go make a song where I say the exact same word over again with cool beats going in the backround to make it sound cool.[/QUOTE] He just performed on MTV's Video Music Awards a few hours ago. He had to lip-sing since he cannot stay in tune :v:

Daddy, my dream came true!

[QUOTE=Vinze;24793375]I don't know who Nick Carter and Aaron Carter is, I'm not sure why you'd assume I'd know everything, allthough since all you've done is pretty much gone on and on about various hypothetical situations and tried to claim you're better than me, I'm sure you'll use it against me. But either way, no human being can keep up with everything. But I do know one good example: The Beach Boys, now they were good, but they could definatley have been better to live up to their reputation and profits. Like for example: Maybe compose their own melodies instead of stealing them from Little Richard. And I did not generalize, nor make assumptions, he has a massive fanbase, he's been known for being self-centered, he's wealthy and he can't even play an instrument. I think that pretty much says it all. If he gets stripped off of his money by greedy businessmen, it hardly matters, the money is still taken, and the product is lousy. We put standards on our foods, on our drinks and on our homes, why should music get special treatment? If we call everything artistic, then suddenly art has lost it's meaning. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/No._5%2C_1948.jpg/200px-No._5%2C_1948.jpg[/IMG] This is the most expensive peice of modern art there is, it was sold for 140 [B]million [/B]$. If you give me three days, I can make something like that pretty easy with paintcans and a baseball bat. It's hardly art, it lacks motive, and makes no sense, it's just painsplashes under a very pretentious cloak. Imagine if we accept this, and people keep making it, what will art be in 100 years from now? Same goes with music, Beiber gives people a lousy product, and he hardly deserves respect for it, and why is that? Because just like art and music, respect will start to lose it's meaning. Get some goddamn standards and stop harrassing me for being considerate about the future.[/QUOTE] Don't act like your opinion is the standard. So you can't look at that and find art. Obviously there are people out there that can. It's not about whether or not something clicks with you. You aren't the king of deciding what is good and what isn't Some people like that, some people find meaning in that piece of art. Some people find meaning in Bieber's music. Don't put yourself on this fucking throne of righteousness, as if because you can't like it, or you can't find meaning, it doesn't have any at all. Get over yourself.

your all just jelus of the biebster

I read "Justin Biebed Collapsed from Plague"

[QUOTE=Tigster;24795086]Don't act like your opinion is the standard. So you can't look at that and find art. Obviously there are people out there that can. It's not about whether or not something clicks with you. You aren't the king of deciding what is good and what isn't Some people like that, some people find meaning in that piece of art. Some people find meaning in Bieber's music. Don't put yourself on this fucking throne of righteousness, as if because you can't like it, or you can't find meaning, it doesn't have any at all. Get over yourself.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://www.greetings.ca/Mona%20Lisa.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.quantumyoga.org/images/the-last-supper.gif[/IMG] [IMG]http://oilpainting2000.com/china/catalog/images/Michelangelo%20Buonarroti.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.theartwolf.com/masterworks/masterworks/1537_41_michelangelo_judgement.jpg[/IMG] And then: [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/No._5%2C_1948.jpg/200px-No._5%2C_1948.jpg[/IMG] Hmmm... You're right, there is absolutley no way to put standard in art through motive, quality or effort, it is just beyond our abilities. Every single critisism is, and always will be completley opinionated, since comparing these clearly shows an equal meaning and expression. [editline]02:25PM[/editline] I totally did not make a subjective comparison to more significant peices to determine that it's stupid and pretentious, it was only my personal thoughts :downs: The last painting is worth every penny of those 140 millions.

[QUOTE=Vinze;24795270][IMG]http://www.greetings.ca/Mona%20Lisa.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.quantumyoga.org/images/the-last-supper.gif[/IMG] [IMG]http://oilpainting2000.com/china/catalog/images/Michelangelo%20Buonarroti.jpg[/IMG] [IMG]http://www.theartwolf.com/masterworks/masterworks/1537_41_michelangelo_judgement.jpg[/IMG] And then: [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/No._5%2C_1948.jpg/200px-No._5%2C_1948.jpg[/IMG] Hmmm... You're right, there is absolutley no way to put standard in art through motive, quality or effort, it is just beyond our abilities. Every single critisism is, and always will be completley opinionated, since comparing these clearly shows an equal meaning and expression.[/QUOTE] Every single piece you posted has a different style applied to it. Once again, you are turning your opinion into fact, or trying to, and calling anyone who likes something you don't, basically, uninformed. You don't know the meaning intended by every piece, you weren't there when they were painted. And the only true statement in your post was the sarcastic one, Criticism IS Opinion.

[QUOTE=djshox;24702899]Facepunch's fixation on Bieber is fascinating. You guys must really care about this kid.[/QUOTE] this who caaaaAAAAAaaaaaaresssssssssss

@Vinze Exactly right, people seem to forgetting that his music and that painting is a huge step down from everything else that was made. The paintings you posted and the music I posted before. It took skill and thought to create those. It took soul and feeling to create those. It took and it has emotions to express. The painting and Justins music has none of that, just because someone thinks they find emotion or meaning in something doesn't mean it is actually true. Considering that painting is just a bunch of paint thrown onto a piece of paper. Though I'll admit that the painting looks cool, just as todays modern music sounds cool. But do both of those have the above I listed: skill, thought, soul, feeling and emotions? other then obviously the emotions that don't come from the ones wanting to make millions of dollars off crap. No, of course they don't. Modern Music and that Painting can be described like this, it's like me taking my keyboard and turning it over and when all that crap came out and pulled on my desk I and others found meaning in it. Truth is, there is no meaning in it, there was no thought or skill or emotion to it. I just turned my keyboard over and crap fell out of it.

[QUOTE=Tigster;24795308]Every single piece you posted has a different style applied to it. Once again, you are turning your opinion into fact, or trying to, and calling anyone who likes something you don't, basically, uninformed. You don't know the meaning intended by every piece, you weren't there when they were painted. And the only true statement in your post was the sarcastic one, Criticism IS Opinion.[/QUOTE] Critisism can be observation too, it can be analysis aswell. If you look at Keith Richards and say "This man lives a very unhealthy life.", then that's pretty fucking correct, seeing how he's a world-famous heroin addict. Stop being such a hipster who thinks that every single pretentious prick with a paintbrush can compare themselves to the legends. That painting is NOT worth 140 millions, it is overrated and pretentious, like modern art in general, it's just another beltnotch for some snobb out in St. Whothehellcares. Modern culture lacks substance, it has no feeling to it, no expresson, no nothing, it's just a way to earn money and get famous whilst people in self-deinal applaud every single halfassed doodle made. I know there's some art out there, that expresses something, with a motive and high dedication to it. But this has nothing, it is nothing, and it means nothing. This is just The Emperor's New Clothes all over again. [editline]02:35PM[/editline] [QUOTE=bobsynergy;24795407]@Vinze Exactly right, people seem to forgetting that his music and that painting is a huge step down from everything else that was made. The paintings you posted and the music I posted before. It took skill and thought to create those. It took soul and feeling to create those. It took and it has emotions to express. The painting and Justins music has none of that, just because someone thinks they find emotion or meaning in something doesn't mean it is actually true. Considering that painting is just a bunch of paint thrown onto a piece of paper. Though I'll admit that the painting looks cool, just as todays modern music sounds cool. But do both of those have the above I listed: skill, thought, soul, feeling and emotions? other then obviously the emotions that don't come from the ones wanting to make millions of dollars off crap. No, of course they don't. Modern Music and that Painting can be described like this, it's like me taking my keyboard and turning it over and when all that crap came out and pulled on my desk I and others found meaning in it. Truth is, there is no meaning in it, there was no thought or skill or emotion to it. I just turned my keyboard over and crap fell out of it.[/QUOTE] See? This fella has the right idea. I mean, if Justin learned to write good lyrics and play an instrument, he'd be a good musician. But he dosn't, instead he has a douchebag haircut and an army of fourteen year old girls.

He passed out because the water bottle hit his head...

[QUOTE=dragonkilla;24795457]He passed out because the water bottle hit his head...[/QUOTE] That's also why you could hear a rattle when it happened.

Such a shame these child stars are always fatigued. First Lindsey lohan gets exhausted and now Bieber!

For a site that hates the dude so much, you guys sure do like to talk about him...this is, what, the 4th Bieber article in this forum in the past week?

[QUOTE=Tigster;24795308]Every single piece you posted has a different style applied to it. Once again, you are turning your opinion into fact, or trying to, and calling anyone who likes something you don't, basically, uninformed. You don't know the meaning intended by every piece, you weren't there when they were painted. And the only true statement in your post was the sarcastic one, Criticism IS Opinion.[/QUOTE] No your thinking of it the wrong it, it doesn't actually matter if the artist of that painting had emotions when he made that, it doesn't matter if Justin Beibers songs had emotion when he made it. It expresses none of them. That most expensive painting, the guy threw a bucket with paint on paper then throw it off a cliff while it caught on fire and called it art. Listen to the songs I posted before, seriously there is a fountain of emotion pouring out not just from the song, from every single note and rhythm played. Look at those paintings, there is thought and skill put into them. Also Vise Verca for the music and the paintings. Both of them have expression and emotion and thought and skill behind it. Just like my keyboard example, maybe I had emotion in it when I was dumping the crap from my keyboard, but was there really any, did it take skill and thought, was there any expression or a passion and love put into it. No. Was it doing anything other then just sitting there with basically a sign on it saying "I'm pile of junk from a keyboard piled up". No, it did not. That is how that painting and justins music is.

[QUOTE=Vinze;24795270] [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/No._5%2C_1948.jpg/200px-No._5%2C_1948.jpg[/IMG] Hmmm... You're right, there is absolutley no way to put standard in art through motive, quality or effort, it is just beyond our abilities. Every single critisism is, and always will be completley opinionated, since comparing these clearly shows an equal meaning and expression. [editline]02:25PM[/editline] I totally did not make a subjective comparison to more significant peices to determine that it's stupid and pretentious, it was only my personal thoughts :downs: The last painting is worth every penny of those 140 millions.[/QUOTE] jackson pollock kicks ass you jerk. Just because it doesn't immediately look like something to you doesn't mean that it doesn't represent anything to anyone. I can make the argument that the Pollock painting expresses more than the others. The Mona Lisa is simply a representation of a real person, and the others are mostly-literal representations of biblical imagery. The Pollock painting is pure expression because it eschews not just realistic figures, but any sorts of figures at all, in a raw emotional connection with colors and lines at their basic level. "abstract art isn't art it doesn't even look like anything" is the worst damn opinion i swear

[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;24795612]jackson pollock kicks ass you jerk. Just because it doesn't immediately look like something to you doesn't mean that it doesn't represent anything to anyone. I can make the argument that the Pollock painting expresses more than the others. The Mona Lisa is simply a representation of a real person, and the others are mostly-literal representations of biblical imagery. The Pollock painting is pure expression because it eschews not just realistic figures, but any sorts of figures at all, in a raw emotional connection with colors and lines at their basic level. "abstract art isn't art it doesn't even look like anything" is the worst damn opinion i swear[/QUOTE] It's paintsplashes on a canvas, I can do the same thing, but it wouldn't mean anything since I'm not famous in the snobbcircle. Once more: The Emperor's new clothing. Apearently I'm "dumb enough" to see things properly. [editline]02:54PM[/editline] Truth is, his name should be "Jackson Pillock".

[QUOTE=Vinze;24795412]Critisism can be observation too, it can be analysis aswell. If you look at Keith Richards and say "This man lives a very unhealthy life.", then that's pretty fucking correct, seeing how he's a world-famous heroin addict. Stop being such a hipster who thinks that every single pretentious prick with a paintbrush can compare themselves to the legends. That painting is NOT worth 140 millions, it is overrated and pretentious, like modern art in general, it's just another beltnotch for some snobb out in St. Whothehellcares. Modern culture lacks substance, it has no feeling to it, no expresson, no nothing, it's just a way to earn money and get famous whilst people in self-deinal applaud every single halfassed doodle made. I know there's some art out there, that expresses something, with a motive and high dedication to it. But this has nothing, it is nothing, and it means nothing. This is just The Emperor's New Clothes all over again. [editline]02:35PM[/editline] See? This fella has the right idea. I mean, if Justin learned to write good lyrics and play an instrument, he'd be a good musician. But he dosn't, instead he has a douchebag haircut and an army of fourteen year old girls.[/QUOTE] blah blah blah criticism, you can't begin to try to criticize something you haven't tried to understand. Don't trash something because it doesn't appeal to you. You have this horrible inability to understand the difference between your ego and reality.

[QUOTE=bobsynergy;24795562]No your thinking of it the wrong it, it doesn't actually matter if the artist of that painting had emotions when he made that, it doesn't matter if Justin Beibers songs had emotion when he made it. It expresses none of them. That most expensive painting, the guy threw a bucket with paint on paper then throw it off a cliff while it caught on fire and called it art. Listen to the songs I posted before, seriously there is a fountain of emotion pouring out not just from the song, from every single note and rhythm played. Look at those paintings, there is thought and skill put into them. Also Vise Verca for the music and the paintings. Both of them have expression and emotion and thought and skill behind it. Just like my keyboard example, maybe I had emotion in it when I was dumping the crap from my keyboard, but was there really any, did it take skill and thought, was there any expression or a passion and love put into it. No. Was it doing anything other then just sitting there with basically a sign on it saying "I'm pile of junk from a keyboard piled up". No, it did not. That is how that painting and justins music is.[/QUOTE] I gotta check out those songs now that you've made such a big deal about them. I didn't notice at first, but this seems promising. [editline]03:00PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Tigster;24795688]blah blah blah criticism, you can't begin to try to criticize something you haven't tried to understand. Don't trash something because it doesn't appeal to you. You have this horrible inability to understand the difference between your ego and reality.[/QUOTE] Nothing wrong with my ego, I am just as good as he is, which is why I don't sell my paintings to gullable snobbs. It has little to do with "appeal", it has to do with "there's nothing here". When that kind of money is involved, it's pretty fucking okay to take a long look at it, and there's absolutley nothing, reguardless of who you are, what you do, there's nothing that even slightly resembles anything. It's all in your head, if you want to see something, then you'll see something, problem is that you can look at a picture of a dismembered goat and still get the same feeling if you convince yourself enough. It's been a common trick throughout the centuries. You're just insulting genuine artists by saying that this measures up to it, this can be done in two hours, how long do you think it took to paint Mona Lisa?

[QUOTE=Vinze;24795662]It's paintsplashes on a canvas,[/QUOTE] so is the mona lisa, the only difference is that you sorta have to think about one to know what it is. The point of art isn't to look like something, the point of art is to incite thought, through whatever means the artist believes possible. [QUOTE=Vinze;24795662] I can do the same thing, [/QUOTE] congrats on missing the point. Just because you can do something doesn't demean the value of it. [B] Technical skill isn't the point of art.[/B] Also, you could not do it because you would just be imitating. You wouldn't be creating something you believed had value, you would just be copying something out of spite. [editline]10:33PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Vinze;24795699] You're just insulting genuine artists by saying that this measures up to it, this can be done in two hours, how long do you think it took to paint Mona Lisa?[/QUOTE] [B]Technical skill isn't the point of art.[/B] What makes a guitar solo good isn't how fast the guitarist is wanking off on it, it's how it sounds that makes it good, however simple it may be. How it sounds is open to interpretation, it is totally subjective and it's subjectivity is what makes it art. The point of art is interpretation, not representation.

[QUOTE=Tigster;24795688]blah blah blah criticism, you can't begin to try to criticize something you haven't tried to understand. Don't trash something because it doesn't appeal to you. You have this horrible inability to understand the difference between your ego and reality.[/QUOTE] The argument is not what it is supposed to mean, though the colors with their basic level thing in crap considering your looking way to deep. I can do the same with my toilet paper, It has these cool lines on it with flowers so I can say. "The lines interacting and crossing with the flowers show the natural flow of nature all around us, while on the smooth material of the paper it shows how smooth and subtle this nature is all around us" Look at that, with some creative thinking I got something that if the right people get fooled by it, I could make millions. But besides that, the argument is what are society deems good or not, Beibers music is horrible and bad, but our society deems it as the best music to every brace the Earth. That painting, ok it's not bad. But the most expensive painting in the world is seriously over doing it.

[QUOTE=Vinze;24795699]I gotta check out those songs now that you've made such a big deal about them. I didn't notice at first, but this seems promising. [editline]03:00PM[/editline] Nothing wrong with my ego, I am just as good as he is, which is why I don't sell my paintings to gullable snobbs. It has little to do with "appeal", it has to do with "there's nothing here". When that kind of money is involved, it's pretty fucking okay to take a long look at it, and there's absolutley nothing, reguardless of who you are, what you do, there's nothing that even slightly resembles anything. It's all in your head, if you want to see something, then you'll see something, problem is that you can look at a picture of a dismembered goat and still get the same feeling if you convince yourself enough. It's been a common trick throughout the centuries. You're just insulting genuine artists by saying that this measures up to it, this can be done in two hours, how long do you think it took to paint Mona Lisa?[/QUOTE] How many times are you going to project your opinion as fact? You project that since you can't find something in it, NOBODY can, and if they can, they are wrong and stupid. Get out of your middle school mentality and realize that not only are you not the most important thing in the world, but that you also seem to have no idea what an opinion or individuality is.

[QUOTE=Sigma-Lambda;24795759]so is the mona lisa, the only difference is that you sorta have to think about one to know what it is. The point of art isn't to look like something, the point of art is to incite thought, through whatever means the artist believes possible. congrats on missing the point. Just because you can do something doesn't demean the value of it. [B] Technical skill isn't the point of art.[/B] Also, you could not do it because you would just be imitating. You wouldn't be creating something you believed had value, you would just be copying something out of spite.[/QUOTE] Okay, so, if it hardly matters who made it, isn't it a complete scam to sell it for 140 million dollars when you simply could have given them some paintjars, a canvas and a cricketbat for around a hundred bucks? No matter how much you wash a pig, it's still a fucking pig, and no matter how much you look at absolutley nothing, it's still absolutley nothing. The guy who made it could have atleast tried to put some effort into it. Or just sold it at a reasonable price, like 25$, maybe 75$ if he just got the cricketbat.

[QUOTE=bobsynergy;24795803]The argument is not what it is supposed to mean, though the colors with their basic level thing in crap considering your looking way to deep. I can do the same with my toilet paper, It has these cool lines on it with flowers so I can say. "The lines interacting and crossing with the flowers show the natural flow of nature all around us, while on the smooth material of the paper it shows how smooth and subtle this nature is all around us" Look at that, with some creative thinking I got something that if the right people get fooled by it, I could make millions. But besides that, the argument is what are society deems good or not, Beibers music is horrible and bad, but our society deems it as the best music to every brace the Earth. That painting, ok it's not bad. But the most expensive painting in the world is seriously over doing it.[/QUOTE] Society isn't the deciding factor, no one tells you what to like. I don't like Justin Bieber, his music doesn't appeal to me. does that make it bad music? No, why? Because it boils down to opinion.

[QUOTE=bobsynergy;24795803] But besides that, the argument is what are society deems good or not, Beibers music is horrible and bad, but our society deems it as the best music to every brace the Earth. That painting, ok it's not bad. But the most expensive painting in the world is seriously over doing it.[/QUOTE] this isn't a logically consistent argument. By acknowledging subjectivity in it's artistic value then you must, logically, also acknowledge subjectivity in it's monetary value. You can't say "People can disagree with me on whether or not this painting is good" and then say "but people can't disagree with me on what the painting is worth".

[QUOTE=Vinze;24795834]Okay, so, if it hardly matters who made it, isn't it a complete scam to sell it for 140 million dollars when you simply could have given them some paintjars, a canvas and a cricketbat for around a hundred bucks? No matter how much you wash a pig, it's still a fucking pig, and no matter how much you look at absolutley nothing, it's still absolutley nothing. The guy who made it could have atleast tried to put some effort into it. Or just sold it at a reasonable price, like 25$, maybe 75$ if he just got the cricketbat.[/QUOTE] Do you know if he put effort into it? Were you there?